Search this Topic:
Mar 12 14 8:15 AM
I choose - therefore, I am
Mar 12 14 8:40 AM
benfranq wrote:Also, according to the alternate hypothesis (which also still remains to be named) which I referred to in post #13, when homo sapiens specimens become sufficiently well integrated into a superorganism, they will not only behave much more in accordance with rational principles, but they will also further develop a capacity which at present exists in most homo sapiens specimens in a rather rudimentary form: intuition.As the superorganism evolves, communication between its component organisms will become increasingly noise-free. At the conscious level, this means that it will become increasingly difficult for one organism to withhold information from the others: in other words, to engage in secret activities and to deceive other organisms.Macroscopic manifestations of quantum phenomena (superconductivity and superfluidity) will become increasingly dominant in the operation of human higher cortices. There will be within each organism not only increased awareness of its internal cognitive dissonances, but also increased sensitivity to the disturbances affecting other organisms: in other words, increased empathy with and compassion towards other human beings.Ralph Waldo Emerson (who at one time was a Unitarian minister but eventually chose to follow his own intuition) may have anticipated the emergence of the superorganism with his concept of the "oversoul".
Bill Van Fleet
Mar 12 14 9:17 AM
wvanfleet wrote:The difference between your set of concepts and mine is that with yours, all you can do is sit back and watch whether it happens or not, and regard if as a cool set of ideas, whereas with mine, if you really do feel committed to it, you can know what to do, there is much for you to do, and doing otherwise will not seem right to you, because not preventing enormous amounts of pain, suffering, disability, and early death, when you yourself have the ability to prevent it, will not be how you will have wanted to live your life.
Mar 13 14 4:28 AM
benfranq wrote:I think that the main point that you're still missing, Bill, is that further progress for the homo sapiens species is dependent more on collective, integrated efforts rather than on individual, isolated efforts.
Mar 13 14 4:53 AM
benfranq wrote:wvanfleet wrote:The difference between your set of concepts and mine is that with yours, all you can do is sit back and watch whether it happens or not, and regard if as a cool set of ideas, whereas with mine, if you really do feel committed to it, you can know what to do, there is much for you to do, and doing otherwise will not seem right to you, because not preventing enormous amounts of pain, suffering, disability, and early death, when you yourself have the ability to prevent it, will not be how you will have wanted to live your life.Now it's my turn to argue that you have misunderstood how Unitarian Universalists actually behave in practice. But that's quite understandable -- since apparently about all the evidence you have looked at in order to render a verdict is the UU "Seven Principles".You have not participated (as I have) with other UUs in demonstrations in 2003 against the second Iraq war. You have not been told, like I was while standing at the corner of Imperial Highway and Brea Boulevard in Brea, California, by a counter-demonstrator screaming as loudly as he could a few inches away from my face: "You stupid old man!!! Why don't you stay home, where you belong?"You have not been hit, like I was while standing at the corner of Chapman Avenue and Tustin Avenue in my hometown of Orange, California, in the forehead by an orange thrown from a passing car.But all that pales in comparison with what other UUs did in support of Martin Luther King Jr. way back in 1965 during the days of the "civil rights" marches:
Mar 13 14 6:14 AM
wvanfleet wrote: I am saying that they are NOT competing entities (which is what you keep claiming),...
Mar 13 14 6:24 AM
wvanfleet wrote: But then to be clearer, I am referring to something specific when I refer to "good." I am referring to the effort to promote not only the survival of our species but also the "good life" for everyone, now and in the future. And by "good life" I am referring to something very specific, namely, as much joy, contentment, and appreciation as possible and as little pain, suffering, disability, and early death as possible," nothing more nor less than that.
we come to agreement on this yet, or is there something still unclear?
If something is unclear, perhaps you can ask me a few questions the
answers to which will make it clearer.
wvanfleet wrote: What won't be productive is for
each of us to talk past the other just to be having an "argument."
Mar 13 14 7:55 AM
Mar 13 14 3:33 PM
Mar 15 14 7:16 PM
Mar 16 14 1:30 PM
Mar 18 14 6:55 AM
Mar 20 14 7:22 AM
Mar 20 14 7:28 AM
Mar 20 14 1:52 PM
Mar 20 14 3:25 PM
Mar 20 14 6:17 PM
benfranq wrote:Well -- I have my own peculiar way of helping myself and others behave both more compassionately and more rationally, and you have yours. As long as we cannot see how we can cooperate beyond that, perhaps we must leave it at that.
Mar 22 14 4:19 AM
Writing is a spiritual experience for me - and one of deep and profound listening. It is similar to meditation. However, when I meditate I find myself first listening for God/Spirit, then listening for my internal wisdom, my soul, then listening to others as I move out into the world. When I write it is just the reverse. First I spend a lot of time listening to others - to what's going on in the world, asking myself the question - what wants to be said now? Then I take time to quiet down and reflect inwardly - what is it that my inner wisdom has to say about this. Finally I sit in silence and listen for God/Spirit. Then I usually go for a run, come back, and sit down and the writing flows. Many times, what I thought I was going to write about completely changes by the end of this process. It is a mystical
Mar 22 14 4:26 AM
Mar 24 14 8:44 PM
© 2017 Yuku. All rights reserved.